If you expect the class to work like WoW’s hunter or even GW1’s ranger, then yes. If you expect a class that can split it’s damage across at least two targets in opposite directions at the same time, able to comfortably fight in melee and range, and you like animal companions, then you’ll like it.
This incarnation of the Ranger has an emphasis on the beastmaster facet, to the detriment of ‘dedicated archer’. Because it’s not a dedicated ranged class, just as (much to the immense rage of certain peoples) the warrior isn’t a dedicated melee.
Nah, bears are the sturdiest; they’re the tanky ones, with massive toughness and more importantly, a skill that gives them regen and another that lets them ignore damage for 6 seconds.
Drakes are good for clobbering groups
Dogs are good crowd control I find; the howls cripple/fear/ect and they can do a KD pounce
I hope you don’t misunderstand me, I’m not really arguing your point Daisy, I’m just saying if you want something to take a walloping, the bears are definitely the pet to use. The arctodus with it’s bleeding F2 is the more offensive orientated one if you want a bit more damage from them.
So let me get this straight Thieves should get there stealth that makes them unique and has been the traditional role of there class. Which has also made them the most represented and played class in both tpvp and spvp
Your animal companion called. I couldn’t really understand what it was saying, but I think it was along the lines of “Stop ignoring me.”
For pets, I wouldn’t recommend a bird since they have a big attack animation that is easily dodged by moving enemies.
Teeny problem with your statement: the op is talking about PvE; ergo target dodging isn’t really an issue.
Drakes are bugged at the moment, however my point still stands; their auto-attack hits several targets at once, the only one to do this, so they’re usually the best at hacking through numbers.
The nice thing about 30 Beastmastery though is, especially for pve, you can pretty much just pick the one you like and stick with it.
obstructed is not just a ranger issue
Yes very true all classes that use a bow have obstuction problems, but who uses the bow for their main damage?
Warrior or thief I suppose, since I’m using a greatsword and axes.
I personally use Heal as One with the singet. Condition removal can be a bit of a git, so when I know I’m going in a condition heavy spot I bring the brown bear too to try and take the pressure off a bit.
I don’t really know how to spec anymore. My damage seems mediocre no matter what. I’m willing to try any weapon combination, different pets, and any type of traits. Also, this is for PvE, dungeons and stuff.
30 Beastmastery, and then either birds like the eagle (single target melee damage) the devourer (single target ranges damage) or drakes (multi-hit in melee, like a greatsword). With Natural Healing, Compassion Training and… something (beyond Natural Healing and Compassion Training the traits are honestly pretty dodgy) the pet will be able to (especially if you bring Signet of the Wild) outheal most damage it’s taking, unless it’s mobbed or it’s the a ‘i keel u’ oneshotter.
Remember to swap the pets when you need so, but also remember your heals will do over half it’s health. It’s much tougher but it’s not a fire-and-forget missile.
For yourself, use whatever. I tend to use greatsword or longsword+dagger when I’m feeling quirky or aggressive as hell-with a drake I can happily chop through most groups in melee in little time.
For your other stats? Well I’m personally using 10 power, 20 crits (for better pet crits and the pet healing on crit traits) and 10 wilderness survival but really, use whatever you want. My most important advice? Don’t expect to see big numbers. Expect lots of not-so-big numbers.
Reroll a Warrior. Your damage will always be sub-par.
Because my goodness, God Forbid the class designed to be belt out the most damage with weapons is the best at belting out damage with weapons. and the class designed to use a unique class mechanic to compensate for the disparity do so.
If you want to use the pet, I recommend 30 Beastmastery; remember, it affects the pet’s durability as well. Furthermore, Signet of the Wild is tied to healing and with the Grandmaster trait ‘Natural Healing’ your pet’s got two sources of regen. On most single enemies, when it’s attacking your pet, it’s entirely possibly for even ‘squishy’ ones like the birds to out-regen the damage they’re taking.
Plus, you can heal at least half your health in one go with Heal As One, which is hardly bad.
My build is 10/20/10/0/0/30 if you’re curious. Skirmishing is definitely one you should go for, since the 30% more critical damage is Yummy, as is Carnivorous Appetite, plus crits are always nice. Especially if you take an ‘on crit’ sigil.
Tool Kit does deserve its Tier 3 spot, especially after the last patch.
The attack speed of Smack/Whack/Thwack are comparable to that of other professions’ Mace attacks. I don’t use that often myself, but it’s okay for situations that require melee.
Box of Nails stacks Bleed and Cripple.
Prybar is a nice clean damage skill with 3 stacks of Confusion.
Gear Shield is 3 seconds of Block. Read: Three (3) seconds where nearly nothing touches you.
Magnet? 1200 range pull? Got a runner? Pull, Box of Nails and Immobilise (Glue Shot or Net Shot). Got a greedy defender on the wall? Pull, Box of Nails, Immobilise. Got a mob to CC? Pull, Box of Nails, kill.
Throw Wrench? By itself, it does sizeable damage. Traited it applies Cripple to EVERYTHING in its path, forwards and back.
This gentlemen touches upon a point. The engineer can bounce around the weapons and weapon kits loudout very quickly; the toolkit on it’s own may seem dodgy, but if you start to think outside the 5 skills and what else you’ve got, you can really cause Fun.
One could say your definition of “Masters of Weaponry” is also an opinion, Being the master of weaponry could mean they never miss, they can USE every weapon out there, the have increased knowledge of weapons, and yes it could also mean they do more effective DMG. It COULD be one or a couple or all, I’m not saying your argument about unparalleled Archers is wrong but I am definitely going to point out where your masters of weaponry argument is sketchy at best according to your own arguments.
That’s my exact point: it’s too vague to expect something unless it’s clearly defined, so ‘unparalleled skill’ is an ambiguous pair of words that can be twisted to fit anyone’s meaning.
The Warrior does more damage, however the ranger can accurately fire a shortbow on the move (as someone who does archery IRL I assure you, the skill level required for firing on the move starts at ‘alarmingly good’ and you’ll still be rubbish at actually hitting anything then). The Ranger has more ‘skill-shots’: aiming for the head, the legs. The warrior’s got one skill like that, the rest are general ‘fire at them and hope you hit’ or AoE ‘bomb on a stick’ style ones. The ranger in contrast is consistently hitting specific parts of the target. Once again, that takes skill.
I get your side of the argument, I really do. However, to restate a point I’ve raised several times in several threads: during the first Beta event, rangers could beat a warrior 1v1.
Very. First. Thing. Nerfed.
So shrieking like a howler monkey that’s just sat on a spiked hot plate for a damage buff to match/exceed the Warrior isn’t going to change anything. The ranger is clearly not supposed to win on their own against a warrior.
If only rangers had another damage source to help even things out… maybe one that did, say, about 40% more damage to help even things out. It would need to fit the ranger thematically, so maybe an animal. It could be called, say, an animal companion…
Sarcasm aside, the animal companion by extension of the unpalatable (for some) truth that rangers are Very Unlikely to ever match warrior damage 1 on 1, has got to pick up the slack. Currently the pet’s got some Issues, some of them quite rotten. That is where the ranger really needs love. Demanding/hoping/begging/expecting a damage buff to match the class designed to be the best with weapons is just setting yourself up for disappointment. Remember what I said above: First. Thing. Nerfed.
SO you really think, that the ranger, which class description says: “Unparalleled Archer” , is SUPPOSED to be weaker then the warrior, the average sword and board/hammer pound away dude.
The Warrior’s description states “Warriors are masters of weaponry”. Not “melee” weaponry but “weaponry”. As in “all weapons, including ranged ones”. You’re shoving previous mmorpg conventions onto the Warrior just as you are with the Ranger
In the first beta weekend, the Warrior could (often did) lose to the ranger; the Ranger would spec for damage, ignore the pet entirely, and win fights.
The class that is designed to win through being superior with weapons equipped, lost on their own home turf.
You may say rangers are supposed to be the best at ranged combat; I say, there’s better ways for that to be so than raw damage.Unparalleled archers… I think this part isn’t sinking in for you. This means that in terms of archery, rangers are on top. No one is better. this INCLUDES WARRIORS.
The problem is what do you define as ‘Unparalleled’? Damage? Then yes, the ranger should do more damage according tot hat description. However, what about in other ways?
For example, firing a shortbow on the move, accurately hitting a target? That requires a lot of skill and only unparalleled skill in a bow lets you do that sort of thing. Putting more damage on the bows so it matches a warrior will not fix things. It will break them.
SO you really think, that the ranger, which class description says: “Unparalleled Archer” , is SUPPOSED to be weaker then the warrior, the average sword and board/hammer pound away dude.
The Warrior’s description states “Warriors are masters of weaponry”. Not “melee” weaponry but “weaponry”. As in “all weapons, including ranged ones”. You’re shoving previous mmorpg conventions onto the Warrior just as you are with the Ranger
In the first beta weekend, the Warrior could (often did) lose to the ranger; the Ranger would spec for damage, ignore the pet entirely, and win fights.
The class that is designed to win through being superior with weapons equipped, lost on their own home turf.
You may say rangers are supposed to be the best at ranged combat; I say, there’s better ways for that to be so than raw damage.
When was the first balance patch?
I’m trying to figure that out too. Can’t have a next if you haven’t had a first…. owait, the first balance patch was during one of the BWE. :p
When they completely gutted the ranger.
You mean the one where they made the Ranger unable to beat the warrior 1v1 without the pet, like they could before, thereby undermining the Warrior as a class? Yeah, that would have been the after the first beta.
The first beta. The first thing. That got changed. The very first thing.
So to all you guys saying/demanding/expecting the Ranger somehow match a warrior with the longbow? Not gonna happen.
First. Thing. Nerfed.
How is that warrior working out for you? Solo’d a legendary yet?
I find warrior toe-curlingly boring actually; mine’s been at level 56 for weeks, while my ranger was level 80 3 days into release. It’s simply that unlike some people, I expect a class who’s sole defining characteristic of being the ‘best’ with weapons to be exactly that, while the class that uses an animal companion to augment damage and compensate for the difference between weapon damage to do exactly that.
Something far too many people don’t, clearly.
I’ll agree he seems to be a nocive in PR; most people making mods usually stay very quiet about balance patches for exactly the sort of excrement-hurricane that’s happened here. THey say there’s a balance patch coming, people work themselves up and convince themselves that the patch is doing to do exactly what they want, then apparently they’ve invested shares into this patch and won’t accept a refund when it’s not what they wanted.
Let’s remind ourselves exactly what we were told:
Poof! Someone called and I am here. We made some ranger changes this patch, but had to go back on them because of risk factor. There are some bugs being fixed and quality of life improvements coming in the next patch, as well as some other significant ranger improvements.
While we work hard to keep updates going on all professions, not very build us going to contain fixes for everyone due to the nature of software development. One problem with rangers is the lack of build diversity created by a number of sub par utility skills. Many signets, a shout or two, and spirits are all a bit lackluster. That is the first place to expect improvements. Second is trying to improve the feel/ pacing on some weapons.
Notice how at no point a longbow damage buff was ever mentioned. Heck, weapon damage was never mentioned, the post implied erganomics were being
Some bugs were fixed: an offhand skill now works with the off-hand trait, Whirlinh Defence works a bit better with combo’ing in fiends, the traits is beastmaster display the right icons.
The rest? All buffs.
-Greatsword’s better; I wasn’t expecting a damage buff (which was a nice surprise) and the ability to block on the move has certainly changed the pacing of the weapon as a whole. Before it could be quite a static weapon, but now you can be a bit more mobile because of that change to the block.
-Spirits have more health, Spirits being one of the things he specifically mentioned as needing a buff
-The Harpoon gun has been buffed (along with other classes underwater weapons) so underwater combat has some more interesting mechanics. Also, damage buff.
I’m not saying this is the BESTEST PATCH EVAR for rangers. I’m disappointed the shouts and signets didn’t get any love this time. I was hoping the longsword might lose the ‘roots you while autoattacking’ thing and I have a quite hope that the Beastmaster traits get flat-out overhauled (The tier 2 ones seem fairly pointless as they are, honestly)
However, the patch did largely what I was expecting, for Rangers.
Those of you who were expecting something along the lines of ‘longbow damage made so a ranger can beat the class specifically designed to win 1v1 with weapons and undermine that class’ role as a heavy hitter using only weapons’ were setting yourselves up for dissapointment. I pointed this out several days ago: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/professions/ranger/When-the-coming-update-disappoints/first#post695183
Everyone was too busy working themselves up and convincing themselves that what they wanted to happen was going to be true. He didn’t have to come and post a “Update soon rangers!” message. He didn’t even need to come and talk afterwards to try and explain himself to a bunch of children crying that they didn’t get what they wanted; something never specifically mentioned or even really hinted at. Now you’re howling and raging, accusing him of lying despite doing largely exactly what he said he would when he came in and gave us the good news. Something I suspect he’s not going to bother with next time to avoid foolish people convincing themselves things that are at best unlikely to happen will; then complain loudly and shrilly when it doesn’t.
What can I say: you’ve clearly made up your mind and nothing will dissuade you from your opinions.
You’re missing the point Balor. The Warrior is the ‘I kill stuff with weapons’ class. They’re brutally simple in their class design; while the ranger uses pets, the elementalist swaps elemental types, engineers use kits and gadgets and guardians pop off buffs, the warrior runs in and hits stuff or stays back and shoots them with their weapons. In that respect, the class is a one trick pony. If another class takes that trick, suddenly it’s not as useful anymore.
The second half of your post nails the problems; the pet needs adjusting, and the obstructed bug needs fixing. Those are the main problems for pvp.
First, ranger isnt the same as ranged class… For example, Aragorn from the Lord of the Rings was a ranger.
And Gimli was a Warrior, guess that means Warriors shouldn’t have good ranged weapons either.
Legolas was a warrior too, a soldier of the elves.
If the ranger matches the warrior in direct damage, especially burst damage, then that undermines the Warrior as a class; it would be like expecting Rangers to use kits, and use them just as well, as the Engineer, or match a Guardian’s ability to buff/protect allies. The warrior has been designed from the ground up to win in a simple 1v1 punchup. Does the ranger weaponry need buffing? I wouldn’t say no to doing more damage; expecting to meet/exceed the warrior’s is only setting yourself up for disappointment. After all, after BWE1, rangers being able to 1v1 warriors (while ignoring their pets) was one of the first things that got nerfed.
IIRC Beastmastery affects the toughness of the pet. Bears are especially tough because they can flat out ignore damage for 6 seconds with one skill, and other gives them regeneration. If you put points into beastmastery (which boosts your healing) take Signet of the Wild and the grandmaster trait Natural Healing (and the minor Compassion Training) bears become stupidly tough. Nothing short of being ganged up on and boss-attacks can phase them.
(edited by Moderator)
Oh so we’re kind of stuck being mediocre until the patch (and maybe even after)?
Massive tears abound that rangers can’t beat a warrior on their own (or play like a warrior, basically). If you’re doing pve, just go with whatever you want. I used greatsword for almost the entire time I levelled with a pet and I was fine. I’m using longsword and dagger now and again, I’m okay.
Melee is very viable so just do it. I reccomend you keep an eye out for toughess boosting armour and/or Knight/cleric’s Jewllery (emerald based accessories) since they also boost toughness. Don’t neglect the pet either. A greatsword ranger with a drake can scythe through most groups of enemies.
If you got that vibe, good for you. Due to the engine limitations it’s not wise to just see the number of NPCs; take Divinity’s Reach for example. That’s supposed to be the capital of the humans, yet considering how many people should be there it’s quite small and quite barren.
It never seemed to me Rurik left with a large chunk but rather a small minority
Small enough minority to have a full sized town with a distinct cultural heritage. That would require a considerable chunk of Ascalon’s population, especially when the Searing’s killed so many already. The Ascalon Census quest made a point of saying that of the names listed, the scribe would have been surprised if half were still alive.
Taking into account the Charr trek accross the Crystal Desert and annihilation at Orr as well as their defeat in Kryta, it makes one wonder how many Charr that are actually left out there. No way to know that really, population numbers are speculation. But it certainly wouldn’t be a stretch to think they lost a rather large portion of their army like Ascalon did.
They went through the shiverpeaks, I thought. Regardless, they certainly suffered casualties with Orr, however that was shortly after the Searing. Post-searing, the actual game itself, picks up two years later. Orr’s already nothing but a memory, so the Charr have taken those losses; and they still smash Rin and attack south of the wall.
Flogging a skeleton, I make this point: there is no point in Guildwars 1, not even in EoTN, that it is suggested Ascalon is going to get better. All the evidence you see in game is Ascalon failing until you turn up to help (which is almost certainly RPG-Protagonist syndrome, I admit) and people dying and being taken captive. Any losses they take the charr can replenish, because their lands in the north are safe and unharmed. It’s become a war of attrition, and with Ascalon in the state it is (remember: not a single hint ingame that it will get better) it’s just a question of “When” not “If” the charr win. The vibe I got from Adlebern in GW1 was a bitter, miserable old git who refused to admit defeat because of his pride. Then GW2 and the Foefire roll along and turns out I was bang on the money; he enslaves people too loyal and/or dumb to leave him to fight in death.
So, back to the question of this topic, I feel sorry for everyone except Adlebern.
(edited by Loki.4871)
@Loki
I’m talking about how the whole thing was portrayed before EotN came out. I keep trying to drive home the whole “it was a different writer” thing but methinks it’s becoming a broken record. /sigh
I still stand by what I said; the char have savaged ascalon, there’s no hint at any point that it will get better. I was honestly surprised when they announced the Charr had moved into Ascalon for GW2 and it wasn’t a dusty wasteland.
Back to GW1, Rurik left with a large chunk of the population, the Charr show no sign of breaking, and by the end of Chapter I you’ve only achieved a pyrric victory of killing their gods; not before said Titans had a little romp around what’s left, presumably killing off anything that gets in it’s way.
Rurik’s dead, so the throne is up for grabs, so there’s possibly civil war when Adlebern snuffs it. He’s too old for an heir, some of the population have gone mad from what happened to them in the searing, more have been taken prisoner, and it’s simply gone to the dogs.
Depends what you’re expecting. I’m expecting some bugfixes, spirits and general utility skills (hello Signet of the Hunt) getting buffed up. Ideally longbow damage too, since the shortbow’s flat out better at the moment, but if anyone’s expecting something stupidly drastic that flies in the face of the class concept (Stow pet for buffs and matching warrior damage anyone?) then I expect they’ll be disappointed.
Loki in case you are not a native English speaker “Unparalleled” means “the best at”. So “in ANET’s own words” Rangers are the best archers in this game.
Damage alone doesn’t make something the best.
@ Loki:
Your distinction between an “unmatched archer” and “the archer class” seems bizarre and flimsy.
Hardly; you seem to equate ‘master of archery’ as ‘Best for raw damage’ only. The ranger can do much more than that, able to stun, while the warrior is more limited in terms of cripple/blind for control. There were two classes called the Warden and, iirc, Archer, but they got merged into one and formed the Ranger. Which only supports my argument that they can do it, but they’re not dedicated to it.
I’m glad you’re not one of those fools that automatically assume the ranger is exclusively ranged combat, and I won’t lie; I interpreted your post as saying that.
My point about the masters of archery is essentially this: the warrior ‘just’ belts out damage, and from a single bow only. Rangers can do more than that, they can knockback, get swiftness use both the shortbow and the longbow. I do archery IRL, and while the fundamentals are obviously the same, it takes time to get used to a weapon, let alone fire a bow on the move like a ranger can with a shortbow. Just being able to do that alone is hard, let alone actually firing it accurately at a target. Then there’s skills such as skill III, being able to fire an arrow behind you. These are all mobility based skills on a mobile bow, you need to be good to be able to do this sort of thing. The way I interpret the ranger’s bows is simply that the shortbow is very mobile (which requires skill to be able to do) and in the longbow’s case, has more range than the Warriors (which again, takes skill to accurately hit without a sight-I assure you, even with a sight, it can be a hit to hard a stationary target)
In the end, I’ve already said it and I’ll say it again; the ranger should not match/exceed the warrior in terms of raw damage with any weapon, because that in turn undermines the point of playing a warrior. It’s my impression you want it to beat the warrior in ranged combat, which is simply not what should imo happen.
Which adds up very quickly, especially when you’ve got the signet of the wild (and in some animal’s cases like the bear, natural regen too).
Go read GW2’s official Ranger class description. This argument has been hashed out so many times that there’s hardly a reason to repeat it here. Here’s a highlight, though: They’re referred to as “unparalleled archers.”
It’s irrelevant whatever the dictionary or any other outside source has to say on the definition of a ranger. Game worlds create and refashion the meaning of various classes, and the bottom line is that the official ranger description doesn’t quite match up with the reality of the class.
It says it’s an unmatched archer, not the archer class. Very important difference, because the former means it’s better at it, and the latter means specifically focuses on it. Must admit I’m surprised by that, since last I saw it said (with a different layout) back in the day said “The Ranger is a jack of all trades and a master of them all”.
Anyway, back to what it says now. There’s the crux of “what does unparalleled mean”? Because if it’s simply damage per hit then no, they’re not but that’s exactly what the warrior is supposed to be best at: raw damage.
On the other hand, the ranger’s got more general purpose stuff: beyond a snare the warrior doesn’t really have much for crowd control. Rangers can cripple, and knockback, the ranger’s short-bow can pin and doesn’t restrict mobility nearly as much as the longbow does for either class. So on the balance of things, the ranger is (in my opinion) the better archer, purely because you can do more. The warrior is a one-trick-pony in comparison. This incarnation of the Ranger is clearly more rounded than most ranger designs (including Guildwars 1 where you often ended up focusing explusively on one thing with classes) in terms of weapons (melee is just as good) and very much more pet-focused.
it’s hard to deny that the Ranger in GW2 is supposed to be able to fulfill that niche.
Proof plz.
I tend to use it myself regardless. The other traits (grimly enough, most of the Beastmaster traits in general) are Rather Useless.
Rangers are not archers Shilian. Warriors spend more time practising with a longbow, so by extension they should be ‘better’ at it. Their roles are quite different anyway, the Longbow for a warrior is more ranged support, the ranger’s longbow is more ‘single target’ orientated.
Furthermore, I’m talking about class balance. The warrior is the ‘kill stuff with weapons’ class. It’s designed from the ground up to win in a 1v1 hit-each-other-unil-one-of-you-falls-over fight. The other classes can (or at least should be able to) win against a warrior, but never through a simple slogging match. Thieves have to use stealth, condition damage and their initiative system to push an opening. Elementalists and engineers have to bounce around their elements and kits. Rangers have to use their pets, and expecting them to beat a warrior without them is pointless.
During the first beta rangers could indeed beat a warrior in a 1v1 without bothering about their pet… guess what was the very first thing that got nerfed for a ranger?
That’s right, the ability to beat a warrior in a 1v1 without bothering about the pet.
Well, after the Titan defeat, they had no more enemies. The Charr were broken as a powerhouse. Orr was gone. Kryta had its own problems with the Mantle. The Guild Wars were over. I guess it just boils down to opinion but by my eyes Adelbern was vindicated by his insistence on staying. He won, albeit with help from the Chosen Ones(you).
The charr were not broken though. The foundations of their leadership was rocked and EoTN shows that there were rumblings of discontent, but it was only with your help Pyre managed to fan the embers of discontent into a full on revolution. Even with the Flame Legion civil war they defeated the humans.
In the meantime, the refugees from Ascalon have settled in kryta, keeping their culture and heratidge-if you look at the town i Gendarran Fields, the architecture is consistent (or at least, strongly resembles) pre-searing Ascalon from GW1 for example (a nice little touch.) Adlebern_ lost_. He smashed his sword when his last stand finally broke simply to deny the Charr a peaceful life after defeating them at Ascalon City. All that remains are echos of a lost country that will eventually be silenced, people trapped in a half-life, repeating actions that were ultimately futile.
Honestly, I like it like this topic. The writing for Guildwars has on occasion fallen into black-and-white to the point of self parody. Ascalon, specifically who has the ‘right’ to it, is a delicious grey-and-grey argument. Neither side are completely right… yet neither are completely wrong.
Reading this thread, I think a lot of people are flying off the handle at what the OP is saying. I get (and honestly, agree) with the crux of his point.
The Sylvari stories of homosexual love in turmoil are really no different than the heterosexual stories of love in turmoil in GW2.
This pretty much nails my feelings about it.
It’s not so much “oh look, a same-sex couple.” it’s the whole “HI WE ARE A COUPLE AND WE LOVE EACH OTHER AND IT’S AWESOME AND WE ARE GOING TO TELL YOU HOW AWESOME IT IS EVERYTIME WE TALK TO YOU BECAUSE IT’S AWESOME.”
I hate this sort of thing, and just because I’m a mistrustful loner with nobody to love and be loved by in real life. It doesn’t matter who the people are or their sexual orientation, it’s an example of the dreaded Romantic Plot Tumour. Whether the couple is straight or not having to sit there and endure someone blithering away about only makes me think “Shut up and get to the point.”
The quest line where you have to save someone’s girlfriend from the nightmare court gets away (to an extent) with this imo because their lover is kidnapped and they’re worrying themselves sick about it. But any couple is constantly going “WE ARE A COUPLE AND IT IS AWESOME AND WE LOVE EACH OTHER AND HAVE I TOLD YOU HOW LOVELY THIS IS” I’m finding myself hoping one of them shortly dies of Plot Device. Hopefully both so I don’t have to put up with the other’s crying because dear god they’ll ruddy well do subject you to their blubbering.
Logain and Queen Jenna’s romantic subplot’s been touched upon; that’s in an uneasy position in regards to this topic, because it plays an important part in the plot. The simple fact is, because of Logain’s love for the queen, he put her above his friends and Snaff paid the price for it. The others (especially Rytlock) are unhappy to say the least about this, and it’s a constant bone of contention. Not so much the love aspect but the “you put her over us” part and I’m honestly glad of that. Logain, even in the human storylines, doesn’t make that much noise about loving the queen. Protecting her? Yes, though he’s effectively her champion so that’s pretty expected regardless of his personal feelings.
Caithe, imo, gets away with it too because by the time her personal sub-plot is picked up there’s no obvious way the group’s getting back together and Caithe, previously established as a loner and borderline outcast (even if self inflicted) amongst the gregarious Sylvari, is giving up on the few people she’s called friends and probably the closest thing she’s had to a family ever reconciling their differences. So she’s going to indulge her nihilism and pessimism with someone she knows loves her (albiet in a slightly twisted manner). It doesn’t strike me as much different from Eir’s storyline in Honour of the Waves.
So, to recap; I don’t have much problem with the romance sub-plots in Destiny’s Edge because as I’ve hopefully managed to show the ‘romance’ part is pretty much secondary.
The ‘secondary quests’ to use the old GW1 term can be… more… obnoxious about it though. And regardless of race and gender, those are the ones that get my knickers in a twist.
I don’t see how most suggestions would help, unless the pet takes the same damage ratio as the player, since they do NOT have any form of damage reduction,
Several pets get regen/health gaining attacks (Bears and Drakes, albeit I don’t really notice the drake doing it’s health bite) and bears can flat out ignore damage for a few seconds. If you trait into beastmaster, Natural Healing gives all pets regen and if you take that with Signet of the Wild it’s not unusual for the pets’ regenerations to outstrip a damage source.
“What does being a Ranger mean to you?”
Beating the snot out of something with a melee weapon while my pet uses it’s leg as a chew-toy.
it adds 200 healing to your pets stats while in combat
Do people really ever rely on pet’s healing at all?
Are they even reliable?
Also, does the healing power affects the number your pet heals you when you’re downed?
Yes
Yes
Very much so. It’s quite a significant boost.
What? Really a wanna be warrior? You obviously don’t know what a ranger really is. Rangers in a since are really no different than warriors. What skills separate them from warriors were trapping and tracking and the ability to tame animals to fight along side them. And they spent most of their time in the wilds. And their primary weapon was not just a bow..They mainly used a bow for hunting and fighting when needed. They could use a wide range of weapons including the sword just as well as a darn warrior. How many times did you see Aragorn in Lord of the Rings use a bow? Most mmos just take a ranger and make them to what they want.. GW2 is about the only game that comes close to making the ranger what they really are, but there still a lot of work to go. If they made the ranger as they should be then they can go toe to toe with a warrior. Rangers would just be a leather wearing counterpart to a warrior. They just wouldn’t be able to take as much damage, but they still could kick your warrior butt in melee. And they got the name Rangers from roving… Cause they roved around a x distance patrolling large areas. Some of these mmos had really done the ranger a lot of injustice and making them seem like a weak class when in fact they can be just as deadly as any class. And stop mistaking them to being just bow users cause they are not.
Your post brings the entire flaw with this argument to the front. Rangers are very different to warriors. A warrior is someone who’s spent time practising with weapons, perfecting drills, used to fighting in formation with other warriors and making sure their weapon is a natural extension of their body.
A ranger does not. A ranger does not spend all their time practising with a weapon. They divide practising with weapons with their animal companion, with wandering (ranging) the wilderness.
By the very nature of their profession’s lore, a warrior automatically becomes entitled to winning in a simple 1v1 fight with the ranger. You yourself imply this is to expected, when you say a ranger spends ‘most of their time in the wilds’. Ergo, they’re not spending most of their time practising with their weapons.
So the ranger’s animal companion helps compensate for this, and suddenly it’s 2v1. You yourself say it; the ranger’s about fighting with an animal companion. If they’re going to do that, and the animal companion is going to actually mean anything, then it’s going to have to be more than eye candy.
The thieves can get away with a 1v1 because they’re designed to make the fight unfair; stealth, poisons, cripple, their initiative allowing them to rapidly fire off attacks to push an advantage. Once again, pull those out of the equation and the warrior is going to brutalise their opponent.
Rangers should not, cannot become able to match a warrior in a simple 1v1 fight. That undermines the warrior, and I don’t want to see a return to Guildwars 1’s warrior. For those of you who haven’t played it, everyone could do the warrior’s job, even the squishy casters. To add insult to injury they could often do it better.
I’ve never seriously used a longbow on my ranger. I prefer the mobility or axes and the shortbow, but I’ve clocked the most time by far with a greatsword, and I’m currently messing around with a longsword+dagger combo-if you’d check my other posts you’d have seen I’m often pointing out rangers aren’t called so because they attack from range and people need to stop thinking they’re the pew-pew class.
A ranger, as I said before, cannot and should not match a warrior without the animal companion. It undermines the ranger’s distinction from another class and it undermines the warrior as a class.
Yeah around level 45 ot 50 we pretty much have to keep pets on passive; in dungeons especially.
Speak for yourself, mine’s by my side in melee killing things.
it was assumed by many Ascalon would eventually recover from the Searing, if somewhat weakened by it. There was no indication pre-EotN(or pre-novels) that the nails were in the coffin. In fact, the signs all pointed toward a recovery after the defeat of the Titans…the source of power for the Charr.
Speak for yourself; there was no indication that there was any improvement at any point, beyond the victory of killing the Titans, the demons charr worshipped as gods. All that remained was a land on scorched earth instead of fields and woods and tar instead of water without a single hint it would get better, the remnants of Ascalon lead some miserable old man that flew off the handle when his son said words to the effect of “We should just cut our losses, even if it’s just to regroup.” Adlebern hated Kryta for what happened in the Guildwars, and utterly refused to trust their ambassador, much less flee there. What he did (which iirc was actually two years before the Krytan civil war) with the Foefire is something I’d honestly expect from the spiteful old git.
It’s not a ‘ranged’ attack though, or at least one that fires projectiles. The second skill is, but the autoattack does not count as one as you can happily flame the mesmers in AC catacombs, but they’ll send your ball o’ fire right back at you.
I hope they do fix the pets. It just reminds me of how a beastmaster was never really viable in GW1 because of clunky pet mechanics.
OgMU8ELfzcS4G0GyS/G8GrM8gcGA
Above is the code for what is probably one of the most broken builds in Guildwars 1. The pets had corner-tanking issues, but the above was almost always powerful enough for you to just punch through it, and once you learned how the pet AI worked it became stupidly easy to compensate for it (much like the hench/hero AI).
By the same extent, you can compensate for the pet AI.
The pet will:
1. Attack what you’ve got targeted. Not what you’re attacking, but you’ve clicked on and who’s portrait and health bar is in the top middle. The only exception to this, is if you’ve F1’d a target, then selected something else. This is one of the most common things rangers do (or let happen) from what I’ve discovered chatting to others; they target something off in the distance, then start a fight with something nearby, without changing their target, so off the pet goes across the map, aggro’ing stuff to attack what you’ve targeted.
2. The pet’s F2 can be interrupted/cancelled with F1. Useful for a Drake, when the target’s moved out of it’s breath attack.
3. The pet will (if you’re just standing there like a ninny) try to attack what’s hurting you.
4.The pet will drop what it’s doing and come to you if you press F3. I won’t lie, I’m not sure if they’ll stay idle if you keep attacking the same target and only join in if you change target, or if they attack after returning to your side. Point is, they’ll drop what they’re doing and come to your asap so remember that when you see something winding up a telegraphekittenel-u attack.
The pets have trouble with AoE, yes. I find it’s generally limited, however I’m using 30BM with Natural Healing and Compassion Training and a Signet of the Wild, so the pets have pretty ferocious durability; I can reasonably expect them to solo most groups on the surface of PvE, and it’s usually only really nasty stuff like being mobbed or hit with the high powered boss attacks in dungeons that down the pet. Keep the AI limitations in mind, pay attention to the pet’s health bar and just accept that when it’s health is low you either need to heal it or switch it.
Could the pet do with more durability/damage when you don’t have 30 BM points in it? No comment. Beastmaster was the first traitline I put points into and the first I maxed, so it’s a non-issue for me. I’d prefer to see the minor traits for tier 1 and 2 swapped though, to reinforce the pet switching and for the tier 1 and 2 major traits to be reasonably useful though. (eg: cripple for pets that cripple/chill/immobilize? Greaaaaat…)
On thing I’m enjoying with the sword in pve is while you’re largely rooted thanks to the pounce, since the autoattack cripples you’ll also root your target effectively. Great for those pesky enemies that like to kite or bosses trying to squash someone else. It’s why I enjoy the dagger; you cripple them with the throw attack and by the time it’s worn off, you’ve got cripple on them again from your melee.
(edited by Loki.4871)
K so back to my original question. What exactly does Ranger do that Warrior doesn’t do better?
Generally speaking, they have more utility in terms of kiting and condition damage. A ranger can quite easily bleed, poison, chill and cripple on the same build with their pets.
Note that last word: pets. The ranger’s damage and utlility is ‘split’ between the pet and the ranger, which has it’s pros and it’s cons. The obvious con is if either get downed then your damage takes a big hit. On the other hand, if a warrior goes down that’s it. The ranger (or it’s pet) can keep fighting, to an extent.
Back to that longbow; 20% chance, yes. If you’ve got a devourer next to you, that’s 3 projectiles with a 20% chance each, so you’ve got a 60% chance for something, along with the chance to poison (devourer’s attacks) bleed (one of the devourer species and longbow). There’s also the traps. They get sneered at for not being grenades, but if you’re standing on a spike trap, anyone that tries to get you is in for a rude shock. They jump it, you point blank them with a longbow, and hey presto, they’re away from you and crippled.
The longbow’s rapid fire is also very good at stacking conditions, so if you drop, say, a frost trap and rapid fire, you force them to use their condition removal or sloooooowly waddle along.
A more interesting question is: why are Sylvari sexually dimorphic? Plants, of course, have both male and female parts. Is there any chance the Sylvari are similarly hermaphroditic? What’s nature’s plan for a race that don’t reproduce through any kind of sex but are still outfitted with sexual organs?
The seed of the Pale Tree was planted on a mass grave of humans. There’s a lot about the sylvari’s origins that raise questions, and it’s never outright stated that being planted on a mass grave is the reason the sylvari look human, but most people think it’s the reason.
All accurate points loki, but I think rangers should be given the option to remove pets. The main reason I think rangers don’t want to use their pet in the current state is because of their functionality, or lack of..
So don’t do a Bioware and just throw the thing out entirely because it’s got some problems. Get it fixed. I’m not stupid, I know the pets have problems but that’s hardly justification for removing them entirely.
I don’t get peoples negativity. Saying things like bet they don’t fix anything or won’t hold my breath. Have they shown they are incompetent in the past?
Apart from the Shortbow nerf?
Yes actually, a lot during the balancing in GW1. The least of which is now that Rangers and Eles are officially doomed to be ever sub par in PvE because they don’t have the man power for the large balance changes. Paragons as well except for for the whole Imbagon build putting them in a weird place PvE wise.
Try a 16 beastmaster build. Take Scavenger’s Strike, Enraged Lunge, Brutal Strike and Call of Protection. The rest is pretty much up to you, and enjoy the stupidly broken damage you can belt out with no regard to your energy costs. Anet gave rangers a broken build comparable to the Ritualist’s SoS. Not their fault everyone was too busy getting erections over the thought of being archers to use it.
Should Warriors really be better at using Bows than a ranger?
Yes. The warrior is supposed to be the best with weapons. The ranger is a ‘jack of all trades’ in Anet’s own words, so like for like the ranger should be inferior in a straight up slogging match. Ranger =/= ‘ranged combat’ it gets the name from it wandering (or ‘ranging’) the wilderness.
Besides, the ranger gets pets, which compensates.
Thing is though, after the huge PvE update for the ranger in GW1 it was pretty clear (or at least, very strongly encouraged) for you to bring your pet with you. I played GW1 since the summer it was released and I can count the number of people who had points in beastmastery on one hand, including myself and my brother.
What happened was everyone shoved the pet away without a second though and decided to be a dedicated archer.
I’ll save the arguments about build validity in GW1 for another day; the point is, GW2’s ranger is specifically designed to work with the pet. If you can dump the pet then many people will, and suddenly all you have is a wanna-be-warrior that can’t match them, because (surprise surprise) the warrior is supposed to be the best in a simple 1v1 punchup.
The whole ‘I don’t want to use my pet’ thing always strieks me as really dumb. Even before the beta, Anet were making a big deal about the pets being an important part of the ranger’s class, and many of the weapon skills ‘prep’ the target for their pet (eg, longsword’s autoattack chain gives the pet Might). Why the massive hangup for this? It’s like a mesmer deciding they’d rather not use phantasms of illusions or clones? Or engineers deciding they’d rather not bother with toolkits and their toolbelt. People were told going in the pet was going to be Very Important, and then start wanting to ignore it?
Rant aside, the pets themselves are (ignoring the ‘quirks’) pretty kitten powerful. They also give you playstyles, in the sense depending on what pet you take, you yourself end up playing quite differently. The Jungle/canyon Spider lets you snare and dot a target. The dogs give good crowd control. Grabbing a sword or greatsword and wading in with a drake lets you belt out alarming amounts of damage in melee.
…increases pet attributes with each kill. Pet deactivates = bond reset
So this trait discourages pet swapping ? …which negates Zephyrs Speed and Mighty Swap ?
Yes, it’s quite counter-intuitive.
If in doubt, 30 points in Beastmaster. Makes the pet tough as nails and makes your healing really powerful (you can do about 50% of your health with Heal As One). More importantly you’re no longer stuck with only bears for a dungeon; you’ll have to keep half an eye on them for when they get in trouble (hello graveling scavenger kd-lock-pounce-attack) but overall, they’ll be very useful.